New Year's Six Predictions: Week 9(According to SportsHoopla Poll)

[Across The Field]

I honestly can't believe I need to spell it out this much. Talk about being blinded by your double standards.

Holy shit dude, so Colorado got one non-offensive TD against michigan. Please, stop being so dramatic, Mary. They still got more points on michigan than they did against USC and Stanford, no? And they did all that in basically one half. Had their QB not gotten hurt, who knows how many more points they would've scored?

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Never one time did I say Tulsa was the 12th best offense. In fact, I even said I acknowledge that they aren't elite. However, they score points. I provided plenty of examples of that. They're a more potent offense than arguably any team michigan has faced this year.

The shit you say is absurd. You admit they've played shitty offenses yet you're ready to anoint them one of the 3 best defenses in the last decade. Yes, that shit is absurd.

They score points against dog shit defenses and get stifled against good defenses. That doesn't make them a good offense.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Holy shit dude, so Colorado got one non-offensive TD against michigan. Please, stop being so dramatic, girl. They still got more points on michigan than they did against USC and Stanford, no? And they did all that in basically one half. Had their QB not gotten hurt, who knows how many more points they would've scored?

Why contradict yourself?

You literally said that defensive TDs shoudn't count against the defense in the same post you said that Michigan's defense gave up 28 points to Coloardo.


Why the contradiction?

 

[ericd7633]

Never one time did I say Tulsa was the 12th best offense. In fact, I even said I acknowledge that they aren't elite. However, they score points. I provided plenty of examples of that. They're a more potent offense than arguably any team michigan has faced this year.

The shit you say is absurd. You admit they've played shitty offenses yet you're ready to anoint them one of the 3 best defenses in the last decade. Yes, that shit is absurd.

They score points against shitty teams, hence why they are 12th in ppg, but nowhere near that in terms of efficiency. I'll take Colorado's offense all day.

And no it's not absurd you just refuse to acknowledge the facts.

 

[Across The Field]

They score points against dog shit defenses and get stifled against good defenses. That doesn't make them a good offense.

They air it out and have scored more points than almost every other G5 team in the last 2 years (along with most P5 teams). They put up 38 on OU last year, who was a playoff team, and got the same amount on Houston as FSU did last year. Again, they're not elite, but they score better than most teams in the nation do. If michigan held them to 3 points, I'd be impressed as well. Hell UCF put up 14 on michigan and they're 53rd in the nation playing in the same conference.

 

[Across The Field]

Why contradict yourself?

You literally said that defensive TDs shoudn't count against the defense in the same post you said that Michigan's defense gave up 28 points to Coloardo.


Why the contradiction?

I forgot Colorado scored a defensive TD on michigan. So sorry. Yet again, they still got 21 points in basically one half against michigan. Odds are it would've easily been 28 had their QB not gotten hurt.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

They air it out and have scored more points than almost every other G5 team in the last 2 years (along with most P5 teams). They put up 38 on OU last year, who was a playoff team, and got the same amount on Houston as FSU did last year. Again, they're not elite, but they score better than most teams in the nation do. If michigan held them to 3 points, I'd be impressed as well. Hell UCF put up 14 on michigan and they're 53rd in the nation playing in the same conference.

They put up numbers on a Big 12 defense? Crown them offense of the year.


JFC you are dumb.

 

[Across The Field]

They score points against shitty teams, hence why they are 12th in ppg, but nowhere near that in terms of efficiency. I'll take Colorado's offense all day.

And no it's not absurd you just refuse to acknowledge the facts.

You mean the statistical metrics that you yourself have refused to explain when I've asked you to before.

UCF doesn't score anywhere near as many points against the same "shitty" teams, and they put up 14 on this "3rd best defense in 10 years" defense. Explain that one.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I forgot Colorado scored a defensive TD on michigan. So sorry. Yet again, they still got 21 points in basically one half against michigan. Odds are it would've easily been 28 had their QB not gotten hurt.

Of course you "forgot". Convenient amnesia.


The fact is that my statement was I don't see Michigan giving up 30+ points this season as long as their defense is healthy.

Colorado scored 21 points on our defense that was missing 3 starters.... one being an All-American level CB in Jourdan Lewis.


If Michigan loses 3 starters, I fully expect a really good offense to be able to put up 30 on us. Hence the "healthy" stipulation.

 

[Across The Field]

They put up numbers on a Big 12 defense? Crown them offense of the year.


JFC you are dumb.

Oklahoma was the 5th best defense in the nation last year, dumbshit. Do some research before you go spouting off. If you want to argue that, argue against @ericd7633. This was according to his efficiency rankings he loves so much.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Oklahoma was the 5th best defense in the nation last year, dumbshit. Do some research before you go spouting off. If you want to argue that, argue against @ericd7633. This was according to his efficiency rankings he loves so much.

Then that is impressive of Tulsa.

 

[Across The Field]

They score points against shitty teams, hence why they are 12th in ppg, but nowhere near that in terms of efficiency. I'll take Colorado's offense all day.

And no it's not absurd you just refuse to acknowledge the facts.

They put up 38 on the road against your 5th best defense in the nation last year. They are a pretty good offense.

 

[Across The Field]

Then that is impressive of Tulsa.

Yup. BTW, speaking of those efficiency rankings, OSU held the #1 offense in the nation this year to 17 points and that was on the road. That's significantly more impressive than anything michigan has done thusfar.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

You mean the statistical metrics that you yourself have refused to explain when I've asked you to before.

UCF doesn't score anywhere near as many points against the same "shitty" teams, and they put up 14 on this "3rd best defense in 10 years" defense. Explain that one.

The explanation for what goes into S&P are on the God damn site.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2016 NCAA S&P+ RATINGS, DEFENSE

• Success Rate: A common Football Outsiders tool used to measure efficiency by determining whether every play of a given game was successful or not. The terms of success in college football: 50 percent of necessary yardage on first down, 70 percent on second down, and 100 percent on third and fourth down.
• IsoPPP: An explosiveness measure derived from determining the equivalent point value of every yard line (based on the expected number of points an offense could expect to score from that yard line) and, therefore, every play of a given game. IsoPPP looks at only the per-play value of a team's successful plays (as defined by the Success Rate definition above); its goal is to separate the explosiveness component from the efficiency component altogether. For more information about IsoPPP, click here.
• Redzone S&P+: This measures drive-finishing ability by looking at the success rate and IsoPPP measures for only plays that come after a first down inside the opponent's 40-yard line. Coaches start adjusting their play-calling for a shrinking field closer to the 40 than the 20, and there is more separation between good and bad offenses if you look at plays in this range instead of plays inside the 20-yard line (as the redzone is commonly defined).
• FP+: This is an opponent-adjusted measure of your ability to create field position advantages. This is based on drive data instead of per-play data. For an offense, it looks at field position you create for your defense (with help from special teams, which is not yet stripped out of these numbers); for a defense, it looks at the opposite.
• Opponent adjustments: Each team's output for a given category (Success Rate, IsoPPP, and split stats like rushing, passing, redzone, standard downs, passing downs, etc.) is compared to the expected output based upon their opponents. This is a schedule-based adjustment designed to reward tougher schedules and punish weaker ones. In the tables below, the "+" designation is for measures that are adjusted for opponent.
• Garbage time adjustments: The S&P+ figures used in the tables below only look at the plays that took place while a game was deemed competitive. Garbage-time plays and possessions have been filtered out of the calculations. The criteria for "garbage time" are as follows: a game is not within 28 points in the first quarter, 24 points in the second quarter, 21 points in the third quarter, or 16 points in the fourth quarter.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Michigan leads Ohio St. in Opponent Points Per Game, Opponents Yards Per Game, and Opponents Yards Per Play.

If your argument is that Michigan has played an easier schedule, then fine. That's what they have advanced metrics that weight performance based on strength of opponent. If someone doesn't like weak schedules skewing things like Opponents PPG, then they should put quite a bit more stock into adjusted numbers.

 

[ericd7633]

You mean the statistical metrics that you yourself have refused to explain when I've asked you to before.

UCF doesn't score anywhere near as many points against the same "shitty" teams, and they put up 14 on this "3rd best defense in 10 years" defense. Explain that one.

I've explained them pretty clearly, if you don't understand them, that's not my problem.

Michigan didn't play good against UCF, I'm not cherry picking though, I'm basing everything off of ALL the games played thus far.

Since you like to use PPG so much, there's only been EIGHT teams in the past decade allow less PPG than what Michigan has allowed this year. Add that up with their efficiency numbers they are a top 5 defense in the last decade. I'll stick by what I said though because using PPG is idiotic.

 

[ericd7633]

They put up 38 on the road against your 5th best defense in the nation last year. They are a pretty good offense.

They are a good offense, they aren't as good as Colorado though.

 

[Across The Field]

I've explained them pretty clearly, if you don't understand them, that's not my problem.

Michigan didn't play good against UCF, I'm not cherry picking though, I'm basing everything off of ALL the games played thus far.

Since you like to use PPG so much, there's only been EIGHT teams in the past decade allow less PPG than what Michigan has allowed this year. Add that up with their efficiency numbers they are a top 5 defense in the last decade. I'll stick by what I said though because using PPG is idiotic.

Ha, no you haven't. I asked you to last week and you said something like "I understand them. If you can't go figure them out that's your problem".

As I said, I'll wait until michigan has faced a real offense before I go crowning them like you are. If they hold OSU to something like 10 points this year, I'll be on board with you. Then again, if our offense continues to play as it has been, that won't be a tall order.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

@Across The Field

Bet?

I think Michigan gives up less total points and less total yardage than Ohio St. does with 2016 common opponents.

 

[Across The Field]

They are a good offense, they aren't as good as Colorado though.

Right. I mean, Colorado is putting up big numbers on Oregon, Arizona State, Colorado State, Oregon State and Idaho State. The best of these is 64th in the nation. But yeah, they're amazing.